10-01-2016, 08:16 AM
I'm glad Ukropia didn't have to attempt a FG. Last night he would have missed and busted his perfect streak. It was that kind of a night.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
Out coached? Out prepared? Out played?
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
10-01-2016, 08:16 AM
I'm glad Ukropia didn't have to attempt a FG. Last night he would have missed and busted his perfect streak. It was that kind of a night.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
10-01-2016, 08:20 AM
(10-01-2016, 08:04 AM)TRD link Wrote:[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=15830.msg174422#msg174422 date=1475332610]
Well how much of that is in Shaw's control.
Plenty. Bill Beli-cheat just went 3-0 with Jimmy Garafalo and Jacoby Brisette. Understand that this isn't pro football but in game coaching, preparation, and game planning, make an enormous difference in football.
[/quote]
Well, sure, but as I pointed out elsewhere people were writing his obituary in 2014 after the utterly inept loss to the Chiefs. This kind of game happens even when you have multiple first-ballot hall of famers.
(10-01-2016, 08:04 AM)TRD link Wrote:[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=15830.msg174422#msg174422 date=1475332610]
Well how much of that is in Shaw's control.
Plenty. Bill Beli-cheat just went 3-0 with Jimmy Garafalo and Jacoby Brisette. Understand that this isn't pro football but in game coaching, preparation, and game planning, make an enormous difference in football.
[/quote]
Well, sure, but as I pointed out elsewhere people were writing his obituary in 2014 after the utterly inept loss to the Chiefs. This kind of game happens even when you have multiple first-ballot hall of famers.
10-01-2016, 08:20 AM
(10-01-2016, 08:04 AM)TRD link Wrote:[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=15830.msg174422#msg174422 date=1475332610]
Well how much of that is in Shaw's control.
Plenty. Bill Beli-cheat just went 3-0 with Jimmy Garafalo and Jacoby Brisette. Understand that this isn't pro football but in game coaching, preparation, and game planning, make an enormous difference in football.
[/quote]
Well, sure, but as I pointed out elsewhere people were writing his obituary in 2014 after the utterly inept loss to the Chiefs. This kind of game happens even when you have multiple first-ballot hall of famers.
(10-01-2016, 08:04 AM)TRD link Wrote:[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=15830.msg174422#msg174422 date=1475332610]
Well how much of that is in Shaw's control.
Plenty. Bill Beli-cheat just went 3-0 with Jimmy Garafalo and Jacoby Brisette. Understand that this isn't pro football but in game coaching, preparation, and game planning, make an enormous difference in football.
[/quote]
Well, sure, but as I pointed out elsewhere people were writing his obituary in 2014 after the utterly inept loss to the Chiefs. This kind of game happens even when you have multiple first-ballot hall of famers.
10-01-2016, 08:22 AM
UDub initially took away the inside runs and Shawgren had nothing to go to. Still early on the QB's but neither has the tools to take over a game and little ability to avoid the rush over two OT's who are not cutting it. Becoming clear that Irwin and Mac are the best receivers as Rector disappears. I don't understand the love for Schultz. Maybe Kaden Smith and Parkinson can be Ertz/Fleener dynamic guys down the road. 2016 may be a holding pattern year, say 8-4 and an Alamo Bowl.
UDub initially took away the inside runs and Shawgren had nothing to go to. Still early on the QB's but neither has the tools to take over a game and little ability to avoid the rush over two OT's who are not cutting it. Becoming clear that Irwin and Mac are the best receivers as Rector disappears. I don't understand the love for Schultz. Maybe Kaden Smith and Parkinson can be Ertz/Fleener dynamic guys down the road. 2016 may be a holding pattern year, say 8-4 and an Alamo Bowl.
10-01-2016, 08:22 AM
UDub initially took away the inside runs and Shawgren had nothing to go to. Still early on the QB's but neither has the tools to take over a game and little ability to avoid the rush over two OT's who are not cutting it. Becoming clear that Irwin and Mac are the best receivers as Rector disappears. I don't understand the love for Schultz. Maybe Kaden Smith and Parkinson can be Ertz/Fleener dynamic guys down the road. 2016 may be a holding pattern year, say 8-4 and an Alamo Bowl.
UDub initially took away the inside runs and Shawgren had nothing to go to. Still early on the QB's but neither has the tools to take over a game and little ability to avoid the rush over two OT's who are not cutting it. Becoming clear that Irwin and Mac are the best receivers as Rector disappears. I don't understand the love for Schultz. Maybe Kaden Smith and Parkinson can be Ertz/Fleener dynamic guys down the road. 2016 may be a holding pattern year, say 8-4 and an Alamo Bowl.
10-01-2016, 09:45 AM
DenverCard, I concur with your assessment. I think the UCLA game was incredibly draining--physically, mentally, emotionally--and some of our regular players who weren't technically injured were just worn out. We looked slow, missed tackles, and just seemed to have a total lack of concentration/focus. Hopefully, we will be ready for Wazzu next Saturday.
Pax et Bonum
DenverCard, I concur with your assessment. I think the UCLA game was incredibly draining--physically, mentally, emotionally--and some of our regular players who weren't technically injured were just worn out. We looked slow, missed tackles, and just seemed to have a total lack of concentration/focus. Hopefully, we will be ready for Wazzu next Saturday.
Pax et Bonum
10-01-2016, 09:45 AM
DenverCard, I concur with your assessment. I think the UCLA game was incredibly draining--physically, mentally, emotionally--and some of our regular players who weren't technically injured were just worn out. We looked slow, missed tackles, and just seemed to have a total lack of concentration/focus. Hopefully, we will be ready for Wazzu next Saturday.
Pax et Bonum
DenverCard, I concur with your assessment. I think the UCLA game was incredibly draining--physically, mentally, emotionally--and some of our regular players who weren't technically injured were just worn out. We looked slow, missed tackles, and just seemed to have a total lack of concentration/focus. Hopefully, we will be ready for Wazzu next Saturday.
Pax et Bonum
10-01-2016, 09:54 AM
Well, I don't know if you can just make it about one game. KSU, USC, and UCLA were all much tougher opponents for Stanford than anyone Washington had played before. Arizona is not known as a particularly physically stout team. It was quite "unfair" for Stanford to play USC, UCLA and then Washington on a short week. No other team in the country will be asked to do this.
Well, I don't know if you can just make it about one game. KSU, USC, and UCLA were all much tougher opponents for Stanford than anyone Washington had played before. Arizona is not known as a particularly physically stout team. It was quite "unfair" for Stanford to play USC, UCLA and then Washington on a short week. No other team in the country will be asked to do this.
10-01-2016, 09:54 AM
Well, I don't know if you can just make it about one game. KSU, USC, and UCLA were all much tougher opponents for Stanford than anyone Washington had played before. Arizona is not known as a particularly physically stout team. It was quite "unfair" for Stanford to play USC, UCLA and then Washington on a short week. No other team in the country will be asked to do this.
Well, I don't know if you can just make it about one game. KSU, USC, and UCLA were all much tougher opponents for Stanford than anyone Washington had played before. Arizona is not known as a particularly physically stout team. It was quite "unfair" for Stanford to play USC, UCLA and then Washington on a short week. No other team in the country will be asked to do this.
10-01-2016, 09:59 AM
(10-01-2016, 09:45 AM)thunder_chik link Wrote:DenverCard, I concur with your assessment. I think the UCLA game was incredibly draining--physically, mentally, emotionally--and some of our regular players who weren't technically injured were just worn out. We looked slow, missed tackles, and just seemed to have a total lack of concentration/focus. Hopefully, we will be ready for Wazzu next Saturday.The UCLA game was indeed draining...but why? It was draining because their defense found a way to stop our offense. So this is the second game in a row that our offense has been decidedly sub-par, with the sole exception of a single two minute drive. We knew our quarterback would be less experienced and would need to develop. I think the greatest disappointment of the season so far has been the offensive line, which seems to have very serious problems with pass protection and has certainly dropped off on run blocking.
A pedestrian, plodding offense can still win games, though, if the defense is superior. That was the greatest shock last night--not that our offense did not work well, but the depths to which our defense plummeted. Our linebackers seem to be very poor pass rushers and very poor in pass coverage. They are an obvious achilles heel and offensive coordinators are going to find any number of ways to exploit them until something changes.
(10-01-2016, 09:45 AM)thunder_chik link Wrote:DenverCard, I concur with your assessment. I think the UCLA game was incredibly draining--physically, mentally, emotionally--and some of our regular players who weren't technically injured were just worn out. We looked slow, missed tackles, and just seemed to have a total lack of concentration/focus. Hopefully, we will be ready for Wazzu next Saturday.The UCLA game was indeed draining...but why? It was draining because their defense found a way to stop our offense. So this is the second game in a row that our offense has been decidedly sub-par, with the sole exception of a single two minute drive. We knew our quarterback would be less experienced and would need to develop. I think the greatest disappointment of the season so far has been the offensive line, which seems to have very serious problems with pass protection and has certainly dropped off on run blocking.
A pedestrian, plodding offense can still win games, though, if the defense is superior. That was the greatest shock last night--not that our offense did not work well, but the depths to which our defense plummeted. Our linebackers seem to be very poor pass rushers and very poor in pass coverage. They are an obvious achilles heel and offensive coordinators are going to find any number of ways to exploit them until something changes.
10-01-2016, 09:59 AM
(10-01-2016, 09:45 AM)thunder_chik link Wrote:DenverCard, I concur with your assessment. I think the UCLA game was incredibly draining--physically, mentally, emotionally--and some of our regular players who weren't technically injured were just worn out. We looked slow, missed tackles, and just seemed to have a total lack of concentration/focus. Hopefully, we will be ready for Wazzu next Saturday.The UCLA game was indeed draining...but why? It was draining because their defense found a way to stop our offense. So this is the second game in a row that our offense has been decidedly sub-par, with the sole exception of a single two minute drive. We knew our quarterback would be less experienced and would need to develop. I think the greatest disappointment of the season so far has been the offensive line, which seems to have very serious problems with pass protection and has certainly dropped off on run blocking.
A pedestrian, plodding offense can still win games, though, if the defense is superior. That was the greatest shock last night--not that our offense did not work well, but the depths to which our defense plummeted. Our linebackers seem to be very poor pass rushers and very poor in pass coverage. They are an obvious achilles heel and offensive coordinators are going to find any number of ways to exploit them until something changes.
(10-01-2016, 09:45 AM)thunder_chik link Wrote:DenverCard, I concur with your assessment. I think the UCLA game was incredibly draining--physically, mentally, emotionally--and some of our regular players who weren't technically injured were just worn out. We looked slow, missed tackles, and just seemed to have a total lack of concentration/focus. Hopefully, we will be ready for Wazzu next Saturday.The UCLA game was indeed draining...but why? It was draining because their defense found a way to stop our offense. So this is the second game in a row that our offense has been decidedly sub-par, with the sole exception of a single two minute drive. We knew our quarterback would be less experienced and would need to develop. I think the greatest disappointment of the season so far has been the offensive line, which seems to have very serious problems with pass protection and has certainly dropped off on run blocking.
A pedestrian, plodding offense can still win games, though, if the defense is superior. That was the greatest shock last night--not that our offense did not work well, but the depths to which our defense plummeted. Our linebackers seem to be very poor pass rushers and very poor in pass coverage. They are an obvious achilles heel and offensive coordinators are going to find any number of ways to exploit them until something changes.
10-01-2016, 10:01 AM
(10-01-2016, 09:54 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:No other team in the country will be asked to do this.
Wisconsin has the most brutal schedule. LSU (neutral field) and in succession: @MSU, @UMich, tOSU, @Iowa.
10-01-2016, 10:01 AM
(10-01-2016, 09:54 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:No other team in the country will be asked to do this.
Wisconsin has the most brutal schedule. LSU (neutral field) and in succession: @MSU, @UMich, tOSU, @Iowa.
10-01-2016, 10:28 AM
I can comprehend our issues on defense. Missing our two top corners meant they basically had a free hand to pass at will.
What I am having a harder time understanding is our ineptitude on the OL. The Huskies DL was just killing us - pass rush, plugging the run, you name it - they did it. Does anyone have any detailed views on why things went the way they did? Scheme, mismatches, other?
What I am having a harder time understanding is our ineptitude on the OL. The Huskies DL was just killing us - pass rush, plugging the run, you name it - they did it. Does anyone have any detailed views on why things went the way they did? Scheme, mismatches, other?
I can comprehend our issues on defense. Missing our two top corners meant they basically had a free hand to pass at will.
What I am having a harder time understanding is our ineptitude on the OL. The Huskies DL was just killing us - pass rush, plugging the run, you name it - they did it. Does anyone have any detailed views on why things went the way they did? Scheme, mismatches, other?
What I am having a harder time understanding is our ineptitude on the OL. The Huskies DL was just killing us - pass rush, plugging the run, you name it - they did it. Does anyone have any detailed views on why things went the way they did? Scheme, mismatches, other?
10-01-2016, 10:28 AM
I can comprehend our issues on defense. Missing our two top corners meant they basically had a free hand to pass at will.
What I am having a harder time understanding is our ineptitude on the OL. The Huskies DL was just killing us - pass rush, plugging the run, you name it - they did it. Does anyone have any detailed views on why things went the way they did? Scheme, mismatches, other?
What I am having a harder time understanding is our ineptitude on the OL. The Huskies DL was just killing us - pass rush, plugging the run, you name it - they did it. Does anyone have any detailed views on why things went the way they did? Scheme, mismatches, other?
I can comprehend our issues on defense. Missing our two top corners meant they basically had a free hand to pass at will.
What I am having a harder time understanding is our ineptitude on the OL. The Huskies DL was just killing us - pass rush, plugging the run, you name it - they did it. Does anyone have any detailed views on why things went the way they did? Scheme, mismatches, other?
What I am having a harder time understanding is our ineptitude on the OL. The Huskies DL was just killing us - pass rush, plugging the run, you name it - they did it. Does anyone have any detailed views on why things went the way they did? Scheme, mismatches, other?
10-01-2016, 11:13 AM
(10-01-2016, 10:28 AM)pcgoode link Wrote:I can comprehend our issues on defense. Missing our two top corners meant they basically had a free hand to pass at will.
What I am having a harder time understanding is our ineptitude on the OL. The Huskies DL was just killing us - pass rush, plugging the run, you name it - they did it. Does anyone have any detailed views on why things went the way they did? Scheme, mismatches, other?
Somehow I had gotten the impression that we had enough depth at DB that if our second string corners had to play it wouldn't give the other team "a free hand to pass at will".
Perhaps it was an erroneous one?
(10-01-2016, 10:28 AM)pcgoode link Wrote:I can comprehend our issues on defense. Missing our two top corners meant they basically had a free hand to pass at will.
What I am having a harder time understanding is our ineptitude on the OL. The Huskies DL was just killing us - pass rush, plugging the run, you name it - they did it. Does anyone have any detailed views on why things went the way they did? Scheme, mismatches, other?
Somehow I had gotten the impression that we had enough depth at DB that if our second string corners had to play it wouldn't give the other team "a free hand to pass at will".
Perhaps it was an erroneous one?
10-01-2016, 11:13 AM
(10-01-2016, 10:28 AM)pcgoode link Wrote:I can comprehend our issues on defense. Missing our two top corners meant they basically had a free hand to pass at will.
What I am having a harder time understanding is our ineptitude on the OL. The Huskies DL was just killing us - pass rush, plugging the run, you name it - they did it. Does anyone have any detailed views on why things went the way they did? Scheme, mismatches, other?
Somehow I had gotten the impression that we had enough depth at DB that if our second string corners had to play it wouldn't give the other team "a free hand to pass at will".
Perhaps it was an erroneous one?
(10-01-2016, 10:28 AM)pcgoode link Wrote:I can comprehend our issues on defense. Missing our two top corners meant they basically had a free hand to pass at will.
What I am having a harder time understanding is our ineptitude on the OL. The Huskies DL was just killing us - pass rush, plugging the run, you name it - they did it. Does anyone have any detailed views on why things went the way they did? Scheme, mismatches, other?
Somehow I had gotten the impression that we had enough depth at DB that if our second string corners had to play it wouldn't give the other team "a free hand to pass at will".
Perhaps it was an erroneous one?
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »